One of Hollywood’s goddesses, and undeniably one of the most beautiful women in the world, Angelina Jolie has announced she underwent double mastectomy surgery in February of this year. Knowing that what Hollywood stars do the public copies — expect a parade of double mastectomies to follow.

Similarly in 2005 when Australian pop singer Kylie Minogue announced she was undergoing cancer treatment, hundreds of thousands of women scheduled screenings, an unexpected outcome that was dubbed “the Kylie effect.”

Of course, this is a bonanza for physicians and breast cancer clinics, but are women any healthier and will they survive longer? That is not likely. Nor are precious health care dollars being spent wisely.

The news story

In a news story, Angelina Jolie, age 37, is said to have a mutation in her BRCA1 gene that gave her an 87% of developing breast cancer and a 50% chance of developing ovarian cancer in her lifetime. Surgical removal of both of her breasts is said to reduce her risk for breast cancer to 5%.

The news report says “the brave star hopes that she can encourage other women to be informed and consider their options.” Bottom line, Jolie is going to become the poster girl for what is likely to become an epidemic of unnecessary screening and treatment.

Apparently actress Jolie appears to have elected to undergo surgery based solely on the results of genetic screening that showed she carries a mutated form of the BRCA-1 gene. News reports did not say she had any solid tumor in either breast.

Only an estimated 5-10% of American women have a faulty (mutated) BRCA-1 gene.

The unthinkable: breast removal without cancer

What we have here is a previously unthinkable situation. In private consultation with a surgeon (who certainly is not an unbiased party), a frightened woman can elect to undergo removal of her breasts even though she has no detectable cancer at all, just a BRCA gene mutation. Surgeons are all too happy to calm a woman’s fears and lop off her breasts before there is any sign of disease whatsoever.

Risk for gene mutation increases with mammography

What is not disclosed now is that frightened women who have a family history of breast cancer, thanks to the misdirected encouragement of these celebrities, may unwittingly increase their risk to develop BRCA gene mutations in their zeal to get screened. Here’s how.

Ironically, radiation emitted from x-ray mammography is documented to induce the very mutations in BRCA-1 and 2 genes that are associated with progression of the disease. Researchers suggest mammography x-rays may not be the method of choice to detect breast cancer among women carrying the BRCA gene mutation. Now a sinister trick would be to subject women to x-ray mammography just prior to genetic testing, and fresh mutations in their BRCA-a DNA would be detected. Don’t think some enterprising breast clinic hasn’t thought of this.

Should women with a tumor in one breast undergo double mastectomy?

Most women with a detected lump in a single breast are not likely to face the same situation as Angelina Jolie. That is because most will not carry a mutated form of the BRCA-1 gene.

A bulletin just issued by The American Society of Breast Surgeons says women with diagnosed breast cancer in one cancerous breast that choose to undergo surgical removal of their healthy breast face unnecessary complications. This physician group says there is no strong evidence that suggests the removal of the second breast has a survival benefit. That advice applies to women without the BRCA-1 gene mutation.

Just when breast screening was going out of vogue

The groundswell of women who are now likely to race to breast clinics for screening, science is pointing to fewer, not more, screening. A report published in the journal Breast Cancer Research asks: “Is the tide turning against breast screening?” The report says screening for detected cancers are unlikely to be cases that were “caught early” and more likely represent women who will receive harmful, unnecessary treatment.

Consumer Reports says: “The medical and public-health community has systematically exaggerated the benefits of screening for years and downplayed the harms. Their report quotes a leading physician to say in 2008 there were an estimated 70,000 women 40 and older who were found to have small, non-aggressive tumors that were treated even though “they probably wouldn’t be life-threatening.”

Lifetime risk for a woman developing breast cancer is ~10%. This in itself says 9 of 10 women screened for the disease will not benefit from screening and may be mistakenly diagnosed with cancer they don’t have.

About BRCA genes

What is known is that BRCA-1 and BRCA-2 are cancer suppressor genes. A mutation in these genes can spell trouble for women over their lifetime. Yet, death from breast cancer is not inevitable as it is admitted lifestyle choices reduce the risk considerably. This suggests these genes are repairable.

It is well known that certain small molecules can aid in DNA repair. One of the most promising molecules is resveratrol, known as a red wine molecule.

Asking physicians about resveratrol

Physicians are not likely to know much about resveratrol in regard breast cancer and any advice to take resveratrol pills would fall outside the existing standard of care for this disease. However, most women would not be taking resveratrol as treatment but rather prevention.

Asking doctors about resveratrol pills is likely to be met with disfavor. However, given there is no proven or available breast cancer preventive agent available today, women may want to ask this question: “what harm could come from it?”

Because resveratrol is a natural molecule that is widely available dietary supplement it is not likely to undergo the drug approval process. If any brand of resveratrol pill would undergo successful testing that it prevents breast cancer it would be forced, by definition, into being a high-priced drug by the Food & Drug Administration. Even if clinical trials were started soon it would take years to prove resveratrol prevents BRCA-1 mutations that promote breast cancer. There is no financial incentive for pharmaceutical companies or physicians to submit resveratrol for clinical testing as a breast cancer preventive.

All what you have read here about resveratrol has been published for some time now but not one human clinical trial has been launched for breast cancer prevention. Modern medicine may be intentionally overlooking the most promising anti-cancer weapon ever conceived.

Women can elect to take resveratrol pills on their own

No brand of resveratrol pill can make any claim it cures, treats or prevents any disease. But consumers can read and learn about resveratrol and elect to take resveratrol on their own, despite the lack of studies that validate a specific brand.